You are on page 1of 1

NAVIGATING NURSING EXCELLENCE: ENHANCING CRITICAL THINKING WITH LOW-FIDELITY

SIMULATION
Eric Nappier MSN, RN, CNE, CHSE
Dr. Gina Briscoe DNP, RN, CNE
Dr. Lynnsie Mims DNP, RN, CNE

Introduction Implementation Discussion


Recognizing cues is the first component of the clinical judgment measurement The SBE was implemented in Summer 2021 with 93 third semester nursing students spanning Results of this study indicate this SBE was well received by the student
model. Failure to timely recognize physiological changes, escalate concerns, two campuses of an associate's degree of nursing program. These students were eligible to sit population and improved critical thinking scores as indicated by summative
and respond to clinical deterioration results in poor health outcomes. With the for their licensed practical nursing licensure exam after completing this course. testing.
current nursing shortage and implementation of student nurse
apprenticeships, it is especially important that nursing programs Simulation faculty/staff set up the simulation experience in the nursing skills lab. There were This SBE could impact practice by providing experiences for undergraduate
integrate lessons on cue recognition and clinical deterioration.​ multiple stations prepared utilizing the same three SBE cases. Students were placed in groups of nursing students to develop critical thinking skills related to client
6. Students then received ISHAPED (Introduction, Situation, History, Assessment, Plan, Error- deterioration. Recognizing and analyzing changes in a client's condition can
Two scoping reviews found nursing students lack situational awareness, often Prevention, Dialogue) report on all 3 patients. Students then assessed each patient, reviewed lead to better client outcomes and shorter hospital stays.
missing cues related to vital signs, physical assessment changes, and verbal client information (orders, vital signs, intake/output record, etc.) in the medical record, and
and nonverbal cues; they perform incomplete assessments and focus on single assessed vital signs. Next, students were asked to calculate a Modified Early Warning System This SBE could be implemented effectively in academic settings with limited
cues rather than the entire clinical picture (Polendna et al., 2022; Gillan et (MEWS) score and determine which patient was the highest priority. Students then completed funding. The SBE would also be beneficial in extenuating circumstances in
al., 2022). Gillan et al. (2022) noted improvement in performance and the CJMM form developed by faculty. If additional interventions were identified by the students, which internet service interruptions would not allow for high-fidelity simulator
situational awareness with various simulations and repeated practice. an SBAR report to a faculty member was required to obtain additional orders. usage.
Orique and Phillips (2017) meta-analysis of 22 reports and 19 studies
discovered simulation experiences had a positive effect on clinical knowledge Students were provided one hour to complete all tasks before a formal debriefing session. A limitation of this study includes the inability to isolate the SBE as the only
and performance related to recognition and management of clinical activity affecting the increase in critical thinking HESI scores.
deterioration.
Results
Preparing and Planning For this study, the sample size was narrowed down to 27 students from one of the institution's
The overall purpose of the simulation-based education (SBE) experience was campuses. A post-survey was conducted to gather qualitative data related to the student
to develop clinical judgment skills in the ADN student entering third semester. experience. Sixteen of the twenty-seven students completed the survey. Students reported
benefit from the SBE in the development of critical thinking skills, see Figure 1. Quantitative data
Objectives included: was obtained by comparing HESI scores from the previous pre-intervention cohort. Critical
• Recognize cues from hand-off of care reports​ thinking scores on the final exam, administered as a HESI, indicated significant improvement in
• Utilize the Modified Early Warning System to determine clinical critical thinking abilities, see Figure 2.
deterioration​
• Analyze cues, prioritize hypothesis, generate solutions, formulate actions,
and evaluate outcomes with patients experiencing clinical deterioration​

Faculty developed three low-fidelity simulation cases with clinical


Image retrieved from: https://calhoun.edu/health-sciences/nursing/nursing-apprenticeship-program/

Forms
deterioration components that included respiratory acidosis, GI bleeding,
and hepatic encephalopathy with fluid overload. A voice-over PowerPoint on Conclusions
clinical forethought and clinical deterioration was created for students to
watch as preparation for the simulation. Hand-off of care reports, medical
records, props for low-fidelity manikins, and a student worksheet based on Low-fidelity SBE experiences may be beneficial in helping develop critical
the National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NSCBN) Clinical Judgment thinking skills in undergraduate nursing students.
Measurement Model (CJMM) were also developed. An instructor key for pre-
briefing and debriefing was formulated.
References
Gillan, P. C., Delaney, L. J., Tutticci, N., & Johnston, S. (2022). Factors
influencing nursing students’ ability to recognize and respond to simulated
patient deterioration: A scoping review. Nurse Education in Practice, 62,
N.PAG. https://doi-org.ezproxy.samford.edu/10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103350

Poledna, M., Gómez-Morales, A., & Hagler, D. (2022). Nursing students’ cue
recognition in educational simulation. Nurse Educator, 47(5), 283–287.
https://doi-org.ezproxy.samford.edu/10.1097/NNE.0000000000001198

Image retrieved from: https://whnt.com/news/huntsville/calhoun-community-college-unveils-high-tech-nursing-simulation-lab/


Orique, S. B., & Phillips, L. J. (2018). The effectiveness of simulation on
recognizing and managing clinical deterioration: Meta-analyses. Western
Journal of Nursing Research, 40(4), 582–609. https://doi-
org.ezproxy.samford.edu/10.1177/0193945917697224

You might also like